
from 


LEADING ENGINEERS 


NAVAL ARCHITECTS 

AS TO THE PRACTICABILITY OF CONSTRUCTING AND OPERATING 

A SHIP RAILWAY. 


ST. LOUIS: 

Gr. I. JONES & COMPANY, Printers. 
1882. 




/ 



LETTERS 

» 


FROM 


LEADING ENGINEERS 


NAVAL ARCHITECTS 


AS TO THE PRACTICABILITY OF CONSTRUCTING 
AND OPERATING A 


SHIP RAILWAY. 

• / 


fi ■ 


h 


ST. LOUIS: 

G. I. JONES & COMPANY, Printers. 
1882. 

L > 




A 


i,* 







LETTERS FROM 


LEADING 


ENGINEERS AND NA VAL ARCHITECTS 


AS TO THE PRACTICABILITY 


OF CONSTRUCTING AND OPERATING A 


SHIP RAILWAY. 


The publication of the following letters from the most emi¬ 
nent naval architects, engineers, and professional experts in 
Great Britain, the United States, and other countries, should 
suffice to dispose forever of the question of the practicability of 
constructing a ship railwajr and of transporting loaded vessels on 
it across the American Isthmus. They are published as they 
were written, with the addition of an occasional biographical de¬ 
tail, to further emphasize the value of their testimony. 

The very able and unanswerable letter of Sir Edward J. Reed 
to Admiral Ammen has already been published separately, but it 
is added to this collection, and will be found at the end of the 
pamphlet. The attention of the reader is particularly directed to 
it, as it discusses the subject at full length, and demonstrates in a 
most convincing manner not only the entire practicability of the 
ship railway, but its superior economy over every other plan of 
Isthmian transit. 

It will be noted that some of the letters are addressed to Sir 
Edward Reed. They reached him at the time when he had the 
important questions submitted to him by Admiral Ammen, under 




4 


LETTERS FROM 


consideration, and are the result of his interchange of views with 
the writers. 

Nothing could add to the value and completeness of the evi¬ 
dence of these letters with regard to the question at issue. They 
are written by men of eminence and distinction in their profes¬ 
sion, who would never lend the weight of their authority to any 
doubtful statement, nor risk their reputations in supporting an im¬ 
practicable project. Their evidence closes finally the question 
as to whether the ship railway is scientifically practicable. In 
addition to these letters, the plan has received the sanction of 
the ablest scientific journals in Europe and America, and I there¬ 
fore deem it unnecessary to reply to any of the arguments that 
have been published by others against the practicability and econ¬ 
omy of transporting ships across the Isthmus by rail. 

Inasmuch as some doubt has been raised as to the practicability 
of the route by misstatements of the topography of the country 
along the line, it is only necessary to refer to the letters of Don 
Francisco de Garay, on page 18; of Mr. E. A. Fuertes, on page 
31; and of Mr. J. J. Williams, on page 28, to show the utter un¬ 
reliability of such statements. All three of these engineers are 
much more familiar with the Isthmus, through the careful surveys 
which they have each made for banals and railroads across it, than 
.any other parties assuming to have knowledge of the route of the 
ship railway. This route has not yet been definitely determined, 
although my surveys have demonstrated the existence of two dif¬ 
ferent ones, both of which are entirely practicable, and on one of 
which there are no grades greater than one foot in a hundred, and 
the distance over which such a grade as this is requisite will not 
exceed one-tenth of the entire route. It is believed that additional 
surveys will develop a still better route. James B. Eads. 

St. Louis, December, 1881. 


The writer of the following letter, Nathaniel Barnaby, C. B., is the 
present Chief Constructor of the British Navy. 


London, October 8, 1881. 

Dear Sir: — I was not prompt to offer you a written opinion 
upon the part of your system of ship railway, to which you told 
me certain persons had objected, viz., the possible straining of 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 5 

loaded ships when lifted out of the water, and as a mere conse¬ 
quence of losing the support of the water. 

I saw that you had so thoroughly considered the question in ail 
its beaiings, that I did not suppose any word of mine could be 
useful to you. 

I learn, however, from Sir Edward Reed, that you think other¬ 
wise, and are not willing to leave any obstacles on the road to suc¬ 
cess, if pains and care on your part can remove them. 

I note, therefore, the question you wish to put to me, which is: 
u I think the problem insoluble of constructing a car, on which 
a fully loaded ship can be safely transported over such a rail¬ 
way as could be built through a tolerably level country?” 

In reply to this, I say not only that it is soluble, but that the 
solution is, in my opinion, fairly indicated in 3 r our plans as laid 
before the Committee on Inter-Oceanic Canals and shown to me. 

Ships which would be strained by ordinary docking, would be 
liable to be strained also when suspended on a car not specially 
designed for their crazy condition; but such ships would be still 
moBe strained in their ordinary sea passages. 

I am, dear sir, 

Yours faithfully, 

Natii’l Barnaby, 

Director of Naval Construction* 

To Mr James B. Eads, St. Louis. 


Mr. John, the writer of the following, is a Fellow of the Royal School 
of Naval Architecture and Engineering; was, until recently, the scientific 
adviser of the Committee of Lloyd’s Register of British Shipping, White 
Lion Court, Cornhill, London, and is now the manager-in-chief of the 
Barrow Ship-Building Company, which has just completed the construc¬ 
tion of the Inman Steam Liner, the “ City of Rome.” 

The fact that Mr. John was for many years the scientific adviser to the 
Committee of Lloyd’s Register of British Shipping, should not be passed 
over without an explanation to the popular reader: The Committee of 
Lloyd’s Register of British Shipping publishes what are known as. 
“Lloyd’s Rules.” These state the different sizes of the various parts of 
vessels by which they are entitled to be insured as first-class sea-going 
ships, and unless all vessels are built in accordance with these rules they 
are refused insurance. The duty of the scientific adviser is to investi¬ 
gate all of the various strains to which vessels are liable in violent storms 
or when stranded, and to determine, according to the length of the vessel,, 
her breadth and depth, etc., the sizes of the plates or planking, the beams. 


6 


LETTERS FROM 


ribs, floor timbers, keels, keelsons, etc., that are necessary to safely sus¬ 
tain these strains. The very highest acquirements in the science of ship¬ 
building are, therefore, absolutely necessary to fit a naval architect for 
this highly important position. These rules being published, any intel¬ 
ligent ship-builder, without a knowledge of the scientific principles 
involved in ship-building, is able to build vessels which would be ranked 
as A. 1 by the underwriters in England and the United States. 


Barrow Shir-Building Company (Limited), ) 
Barrow-in-Furness, Lancashire, Oct. 6th, 1881. j 

My Dear Sir Edward:— 

I have, in accordance with your request, carefully thought over 
the question of the ship railway, and altho’ the practical difficul¬ 
ties of carrying it out would be great and will require the most 
careful foresight and arrangement, and the most accurate calcula- 
tions, I do not see that the problem is at all an impossible one. 

The practice of lifting a ship of large size clean out of the 
water has become an every-day occurrence. The further step of 
lifting her to a considerable height is not a great one, especially if 
you can start with her floating in a considerable depth of water. 
Beyond these the conveyance of her over a railway, provided the 
latter is moderately level and moderately straight, is a simple 
matter which is certainly not outside the reach of civil engineers. 

We could unquestionably do the lifting and depositing part of 
the business, and from an engineering and scientific poipt of Anew 
these must be the greatest difficulties. 

I do not enter into the question of cost, because it would in¬ 
volve an investigation of details which I have not at the present 
moment the time for. I would not, however, hesitate to go into 
it if it was coming to immediate practical business. 

Believe me, yours faithfully, 

Wm. John. 

Sir E. J. Heed, K. C. B., M. P., Broadway Chambers, West¬ 
minster. 


George Fosbury Lyster, Esq., the writer of the following letter, is the 
engineer-in-chief of the Liverpool Docks, a position which he has held for 
twenty years. He is recognized as one of the most able and conserva¬ 
tive engineers in England. The docks referred to, constructed from the 
designs of Mr Lyster, are among the wonders of the world. The Alex- 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


7 


andra Docks, opened by H. R. H., the Prince of Wales, on the 8tli of Sep¬ 
tember last, required seven years in their construction, and involved an 
■expenditure of twenty-five million dollars. Either one of two of the 
Alexandra Docks is capable of docking the “ Great Eastern ” 


Mersey Dock Estate, \ 
Engineer’s Office, Dock Yard, > 
Liverpool, 2d November, 1881. ) 

Dear Mr. Eads:— 

In reply to your letter of the lGth ult., referring to the several 
interviews I have had with you during your recent visit to this 
country, on the interesting subject of your proposed ship railway 
across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, as also to the papers which 
you were good enough to leave with me, further illustrating your 
opinions on the point, I have now been able to give the whole mat¬ 
ter, as far as its engineering features are concerned, very careful 
consideration, and have concluded that if the permanent way, 
cradle arrangements, and general details are carried out in the inge¬ 
nious and substantial manner you described, there will, in my judg¬ 
ment, be little or no difficulty in transporting properly constructed 
ships from sea to sea with entire convenience and safety. 

As regards the advantages of the geographical position selected 
by you for the undertaking — not having visited the locality, I, of 
course, am unable to give an opinion of any value on the point; 
but from the views you laid before me, and the reasons you urge 
for its adoption, it appears to me that your arguments are unan- 
answerable and worthy of support. 

Wishing you every success towards the fulfillment of this grand 
conception, I remain, Yours very faithfully, 

George Fosbury Lyster, 

C. E. , and Mem. Inst. C. E .. Engineer-in-Chief , Liverpool Docks. 

James B. Eads, Esq., 

502 Chamber of Commerce, St. Louis, U. S. A. 


Mr. John Fowler, the writer of the following letter, was consulting 
engineer of the Egyptian Government, engineer-in-chief of the Metro¬ 
politan (Underground) Railway of London, and is now constructing 
by far the largest bridge in the world. He is a past president of the 
Institute of Engineers in England, and a gentleman who is recognized 
as one of the ablest and most experienced of living engineers: — 

2 Queen Square Place, Westminster, September 4, 1881. 

My Dear Sir :—You will be interested to know that about 


LETTERS FROM 


8 

eight years ago, when acting as consulting engineer to the Egyp¬ 
tian Porte, I Avas instructed to prepare a project for the transport 
of steamers and other vessels from one level to the other at the 
First Cataract of the Nile. 

After a very careful investigation of the alternative plans of 
canal and ship railway on the spot, I decided in favor of the rail¬ 
way, having satisfied myself that there was no mechanical diffi¬ 
culty in carrying ships of any size, without injury to themselves, 
on a properly designed car or cradle over a solidly constructed 
railway. Yours very truly, 

John Fowler. 

Capt. James B. Eads. 


The distinguished writer of the following letter, Mr. E. Leader Williams, 
was the chief engineer of the Trent and Mersey Canal, and was the origina¬ 
tor of the celebrated Anderton Lift, which unites the River Weaver with the 
canal by means of an ingenious arrangement by which a section of the 
canal, about 150 feet long and containing two barges and the water in 
which they float, weighing in all about 250 tons, is raised and lowered 
by simple hydraulic apparatus through the space of fifty feet. 

This lift has been in operation for seven years without the slightest acci¬ 
dent, and has given such satisfaction that the government of France has 
ordered one of four times its capacity to connect two different levels of 
one of the French canals, and the government of Belgium is now building 
four similar ones of still greater capacity: — 

l 

Queen’s Chambers, John Dalton St., ) 
Manchester, September 5, 1881. j 

Dear Sir: — I consider your plan for a ship railway quite prac¬ 
ticable, and that it may be developed into a sound commercial 
enterprise. 

When I first proposed to lift loaded boats vertically fifty feet, 
so as to pass them in three minutes from the River Weaver to the 
Trent and Mersey Canal without locks, many persons considered 
my scheme visionary. You, however, have seen the lift at work, 
and it has now been in constant operation, without any hitch, for 
the past seven y^ears. 

I believe that your ship railway only requires carrying out into 
execution to prove most successful in every way. 

Yours very truly, 

E. Leader Williams, 

M. Inst. C. E. 

James B. Eads, Esq. 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


9 


The following letter is from the engineer now in charge of the Ancler- 
ton Lift:— 


Weaver Navigation, Engineer’s Office, ) 
Northwich, England, October 20th, 1881. 5 

My Dear Sir :—Having been for five years employed in super¬ 
intending and carrying out works of various descriptions in ship¬ 
building yards, including the construction of ships of large size, 
and the repair of ships on hauling up slips, and having for the 
last four years had charge of the AndertonLift on this navigation, 
which is used daily for raising laden barges a height of fifty feet 
to transfer them to a canal on the upper level, I am satisfied that 
the proposal of Captain Eads to raise ships by mechanical means 
and convey them overland on a railway and on carriages espe¬ 
cially designed for the purpose, is one wfiiich is feasible and ought 
to succeed ; and that the strains on the hull may be more accu¬ 
rately calculated and provided for on land than is possible when 
ships are subject to the varying conditions inseparable from a sea 
passage in stormy weather. I remain, 

Yours faithfully, 

Lionel B. Wells, 

M . Inst. C. E. 

Sir E. J. Reed, K. C. B., F. R. S., M. P. 


Mr. Duer, the writer of the following letter, is an able civil engineer, 
who has devoted many years of his life to the study of hydraulic appa¬ 
ratus for lifting vessels: — 


6 Westminster Chambers, ) 
Victoria Street, London, September 2, 188L ) 
Captain Eads, etc., etc. 

Dear Sir: — Previous to the day on which I had the pleasure 
of meeting you at Anderton, and of there explaining to you the 
details of the canal-lift, a ship railway was a subject to which I 
had never given serious attention, and for want of proper exami¬ 
nation my prejudices were not favorable to it. Since that time I 
have, however, given a considerable amount of thought to this 
subject, and as I have for many years been in the habit of seeing 
ships standing out of the water on floating -pontoons, and moved 
about in all kinds of weather at the Victoria Docks, my mind 


10 


LETTERS FROM 


could easily pass to the consideration of a ship similarly mounted 
on a carriage on land ; and when it is remembered that the ships 
at the Victoria and other hydraulic docks remain on the pontoons 
for days and weeks together, sometimes with their cargoes on 
board, I feel that there ought to be no doubt as to the safety of a 
ship at rest on a properly constructed carriage. 

As all the details of the large hydraulic dock which was con¬ 
structed ten years ago for the government of Bombay, were 
entrusted to my care, and as this dock is capable of lifting any 
ship afloat, my experience fully justifies me in saying that the 
largest ship can be as readily and safely placed on a carriage as a 
small one can. 

When, again, I reflect on the nature of the strains to which a ship 
is subject at sea; the shocks that occur from the blows of heavy 
seas, and the large portions of the ship’s surface that are at times 
entirely out of the water, 1 begin to wonder why any one should 
doubt that it would be as safe or even safer on a well-constructed 
railway than when so tossed and buffeted about in what we have 
hitherto regarded as its proper element. As I am not acquainted 
with railway traveling in America, I must call to your remembrance 
the ease and comfort with which one journeys on the London and 
Northwestern Railway of England. It is not difficult on this rail¬ 
way to forget altogether that one is traveling, while in a gale at 
sea this oblivion is impossible. 

As a ship is ordinarily supported in a graving-dock on keel blocks 
with side shores placed on the altars, as the level of the water 
in the dock falls, it must be considerably strained, as almost the 
whole of its weight is carried on the keel; but when the bilge- 
blocks are carefully introduced under water while the ship is 
afloat it must be almost, if not quite, as free from strain as when 
in smooth water. To avoid all danger from too much weight being 
carried on the keel, the bilge-blocks for the Bombay Dock were 
so designed that the ship on a pontoon can, if desired, be lifted 
entirely off its keel and the whole of its weight carried on the bilges. 
With a system of blocking so entirely under control it is impos¬ 
sible that a ship can be injured while on a good carriage on a good 
railway, as the deck-beams must be amply sufficient to resist any 
outward thrust that can arise from the cargo. In a word, we may 
say, from long experience, that there is no danger or difficulty in 
placing a loaded ship on a carriage suitable for a railway, of trans- 






LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 11 

porting that ship and carriage from the water to the railway; and 
when this is done, I am of opinion that it will not be difficult to 
draw it quickly and safely across the Isthmus. 

These and other considerations too numerous to trouble you 
with in a letter which has already become too long, have converted 
me from being skeptical to having perfect confidence in the railway 
you propose, and I hope that you may be enabled to carry out 
your project which, while being perfectly practicable, so far exceeds 
in grandeur anything that man has yet attempted. 

I am, dear sir, 

Yours faithfully, 

SlDENGHAM DUER. 


The following letter is from the distinguished civil engineers, Clark & 
Standfield, who have had a most extensive and successful experience in 
lifting ships. Mr. Edvvin Clark was the chief assistant of Robert Stephen¬ 
son in the building of the celebrated tubular bridge over the Menai 
Straits, and is the engineer who introduced the hydraulic vertical lift sys¬ 
tem, the most notable example of this kind being at Bombay; another, 
of lesser capacity, at Malta; and still another at the Victoria Docks, in 
London, all of which works have given the most perfect satisfaction:— 

6 Westminster Chambers, ) 
London, September 6, 1881. > 

Capt. J. B. Eads, C. E. 

Dear Sir: — Referring to our interview on the subject of the 
proposed ship railway across the American Isthmus, we now beg 
to say that our works are. likely to be so much occupied during the 
next year that we should scarcely be in a position to execute any 
works out of England in connection with the proposed railway, 
but we should be very happy to prepare the drawings for the con¬ 
struction of the terminal works for lifting the vessels at the At¬ 
lantic and Pacific ports. 

We understand it will be requisite to transport loaded vessels of 
the weight of 4,000 to 6,000 tons, more or less, on the railway at 
the rate of about six miles per hour, on a gradient of one or two per 
cent, and that it will be required to raise the vessels on a railway 
car out of the water to a variable height not exceeding 46 feet, 
and deposit them on the rails in a time not exceeding thirty min¬ 
utes. These conditions may be fulfilled in two different ways, 
and we need not say that it is a plan in which Mr. Edwin Clark 


12 


LETTERS FROM 


has entire confidence, and in which he will take the fullest interest 
in arranging the details. The hydraulic system would probably 
be the most rapid but probably the more costty. At the Bombay 
Hydraulic Dock we have iifted weights up to 12,000 tons, with 72 
presses, 14 inches diameter, and 36 feet stroke. The Victoria and 
Malta Hydraulic Docks have been many years in constant opera¬ 
tion. 

At the canal lift at Fontinettes we employ presses with rams, 
6 feet 7 inches in diameter, with a 50-feet stroke. Each of these 
presses will raise a dead weight of 1,000 tons through a height 
of about 50 feet, in three minutes. The weight lifted is a movable 
portion of the canal, about 132 feet long, containing the water 
and a barge floating in it. This work is now in course of con¬ 
struction for the French government, and it is to be erected near 
St. Omer, in France, and we are now designing a set of four sim¬ 
ilar canal lifts for the Belgian government, in which the weight 
raised will be somewhat larger. It is evident that a few presses 
such as these w’ould more than accomplish the work required. 

Our ordinary depositing dock, similar to that at Sebastopol, 
which raises vessels of 6,000 tons, would also meet the require¬ 
ments of the case very satisfactorily. We are now’ constructing 
a second of these docks, of 10,000 tons, for the Russian govern¬ 
ment at Vladivostok, and a third, of 3,000 tons, for the Barrow’ 
and Railway Company, at Barrow-in-Furness, to be after¬ 
wards increased to 5,000 tons. We have designed one of these 
docks for the Italian government, to raise iron-clads of 15,000 
tons’ weight with a lift of 30 feet. There w’ould be no difficulty 
in modifying the proportions so as to render it suitable for a lift 
of 46 feet, and this form of dock raises the vessels out of the 
water and deposits them on a gridiron stage in a most convenient 
manner for railway transport. 

It will probably depend to a great extent on their relative cost 
as to w’hich of these systems may be adopted, and w’e shall be 
prepared at any time to go into the necessary calculations, and 
render every assistance in our power towards the accomplishment 
of the great work in which you are engaged. 

We apprehend no difficulty in perfecting the necessary details 
of the plans so as to insure the safe transportation of the largest 
loaded ships on the railway cars with absolute safety. 

We remain, dear sir, yours faithfully, 

Clark & Sxandfield. 



LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 13 

The writers of the following letter are the contracting engineers who 
constructed the Anderton Lift and the hydraulic docks at Malta and at 
Bombay. The execution of these works was so satisfactory as to prompt 
the most flattering testimonials in their behalf: — 


Heaton Foundry, Stockport, October 1, 1881. 
James B. Eads, Esq., C. E. 

My Dear Sir :—When yon are ready to commence the con¬ 
struction of your ship railway, we shall be pleased to undertake 
the building and completion of the necessary works for placing 
the ship, with her cargo, on the railway track, ready for attaching 
the locomotives to her, and after transport across the Isthmus to 
lower her safely again until she is afloat. A lifting apparatus will be 
required at each side of the Isthmus which will lift or lower ships 
as required. This portion of the work we are fully prepared to 
execute with the greatest promptness, on the same terms on which 
we built the hydraulic docks at Bombay and Malta, and the An¬ 
derton Canal Lift in Cheshire. 

We have no hesitation in guaranteeing the lifting of a fully 
loaded ship or steamer of 8,000 or 10,000 tons’ weight on a rail¬ 
way car from the sea or harbor level to that of your permanent 
way in 30 minutes, with absolute safety to the ship and the works 
where the lift is not over 50 feet vertically. We will undertake to 
construct all the plans and works necessary to do this at each end 
of your line, and complete everything ready for attaching the loco¬ 
motive to the car on which the ship is to be lifted and transported ; 
this car, or any number of them, we will furnish also. 

The locomotives and railway construction are not in our line; 
but if it were a matter of importance to cover, in addition, the 
construction of the locomotives, turn-tables, etc., and ten miles of 
railway, as proposed by you to the United States, we have no 
doubt we could unite with us some other responsible parties en¬ 
gaged in that kind of works, to execute them and guarantee the 
safe transportation of the loaded ships of the weight mentioned, 
over the railwa}^. Very truly yours, 

Emmerson, Murgatroyd & Co. 


The following letter is from W. Pearce, Esq., who is the sole proprie¬ 
tor of John Elder & Company’s works, Govan, Glasgow. These 
works are so celebrated that it is only necessary to say that a great many 



14 


LETTERS FROM 


of the finest and largest steamers trading between New York and Great 
Britain were constructed in them:— 


Fairfield Works, > 

Govan, near Glasgow, 26th August, 1881. ) 

My Dear Sir Edward: — 

In replying to the letter enclosed in your note to me of the 
17th inst., I would observe that the constant use of iron floating 
docks proves that the largest ships, including heavy armour clads, 
may be lifted out of the water without any damage, and also that 
loaded ships may be lifted upon the same conditions as if they 
were put into a graving-dock loaded. 

I am of opinion, from what I know of the working of iron 
floating docks that I have designed and built, that iron steamers of 
4,000 to 5,000 tons’ displacement maybe docked, loaded, without 
any injury whatever. 

It is also my opinion that a ship railway for vessels of this 
size may be constructed and worked successfully, provided the 
land is solid and the line moderately level. 

I remain, my dear Sir Edward, 

Yours faithfully, 

Wm. Pearce. 

Sir E. J. Reed, K. C. B., M. P. 


The writer of the following letter, Mr. B. Baker, is the partner of 
Mr. John Fowler, C. E., ancl is recognized as one of the ablest engineers 
in London:— 

• 

2 Queen Square Place, 
Westminster, September 13, 1881. 

Dear Captain Eads : — 

As you are aware, I have during the past twenty years had 
occasion to consider, in conjunction with Mr. Fowder, mail}” novel 
problems, and amongst them the transport of laden vessels by rail 
and by pontoon. One project elaborated by us w r as a ship-incline 
at the First Cataract of the Nile, and another was a ship-canal 
from Alexandria, through Cairo, to Suez. The latter project 
involved the elevation of the largest ocean steamships high and 
dry on shallow pontoons for the purpose of passing them across 
the Nile at low summer level. Political jealousies alone have 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


15 


delayed the execution of this work. English and French capital¬ 
ists are still prepared to find the required £10,000,000, and ship¬ 
owners to entrust their laden vessels to the pontoons. 

Whether a ship be placed on a railway car or on a pontoon will 
obviously not affect the question of the safety of her being lifted 
high and dry when fall}’ laden. When critics have expressed to me 
their opinion that a ship would be injured by so doing, I have 
invited them to condescend to a little more detail, and to point out 
which bottom plate would be bulged, which frame bent, which 
butt-joint opened, and why? The general laws affecting the strength 
of materials apply to iron and steel ships as to other metallic 
structures, and in order to show that any of the above injuries 
could result, I have satisfied myself, by long and careful investi¬ 
gation, it is first necessary to assume either criminal negligence or 
a singularly badly designed car. In other words, apart from all 
practical experience in dry docks and elsewhere, it can be theoret¬ 
ically demonstrated that a vessel which would not break up at sea 
in an ordinary gale, would not be injured by transport in a well- 
constructed car, on a suitably formed railway. 

With reference to the latter point I am prepared to admit that a 
railway which may be all that could be desired for the high-speed 
transit of an articulated railway train, is not necessarily suitably 
formed for the transport, at comparatively low speeds, of a long, 
rigid car and ship. Elasticity is one of the chief desiderata in the 
first case,while perfect immobility is the most important in the sec¬ 
ond. In rock cuttings perfect immobility is clearly at once attaina¬ 
ble, by simply laying the steel rails direct on the rock and holding 
them down by spikes driven into oak trenails fixed in holes drilled 
in the rock. This may, perhaps, appear a bold and novel experi¬ 
ment to some engineers, but it is nothing of the sort. About thir¬ 
ty-five years ago a portion of the Leeds and Manchester Railway 
was so laid, the cast-iron chairs being spiked directly to the rock: 
and the system, though necessarily too hard and rigid for fast 
trains, proved quite satisfactory for slow-speed traffic. In ordi¬ 
nary cuttings through soft soil, immobility would, in my opinion, be 
best attained by reverting to the old plan of stone block sleepers, 
and bedding them in a continuous foundation of concrete laid 
under each rail. In the case of embankments, special precautions 
would be required to attain immobility. I understand that the 
banks will be formed of the material taken from the rock cuttings. 


1() 


LETTERS FROM 


and nothing better for the purpose could be desired. It is neces¬ 
sary, however, to remember that the voids in a rubble bank consti¬ 
tute about thirty to forty per cent of the whole contents, and that 
such banks are liable for some years to considerable and unequal 
settlement, unless these voids are previously filled with smaller 
materials. At Alderney Breakwater, for instance, although the 
rubble mound was allowed three years to settle before the masonry 
superstructure was commenced, the latter'sunk about six feet into 
the mound, in places. In my own practice, I have found that all 
settlement is obviated if a proper proportion of sand and gravel 
or quarry rid be tipped with the rubble, and the bank be watered 
liberally as it is brought up. If you adopt this plan, and take the 
additional precaution of running a twenty-ton steam road roller a 
few times along the line of each rail-bed previous to putting on 
the concrete foundation for the stone block sleepers, you will, I 
have no doubt, attain as perfect immobility on the banks as else¬ 
where. 

It will be self-evident to most persons that ship-owners would 
much prefer to entrust their ships to a special roadway, as true 
and inflexible as a lathe-bed, than to an ordinary elastic railway, 
the truth of which would be dependent upon the care bestowed by 
the plate-layers in packing the sleepers. The saving in main¬ 
tenance is also self-evident, for with good 80 pound steel rails 
spiked to 2 feet square by 1 foot thick stone sleepers bedded upon 
a continuous layer of Portland cement concrete 2 feet 6 inches 
wide by 1 foot thick, the road should not require touching for ten 
years. Some engineers may doubt the propriety of dispensing 
with the elastic timber sleepers and bedding the rails direct on 
stone and concrete, therefore it may be well to say a few words 
on that point. 

Firstly, I would quote the following opinion of Stephenson, 
expressed at the Inst, of C. E. long ago, at the time when about 
one-half of the railways in this country were laid with stone blocks 
and the other half with wooden sleepers: ‘ ‘ Stone blocks suffice 
for a railway for the conveyance of heavy minerals at a speed of 
about twelve miles an hour;” indeed, he thought “ a stone block 
road offered less resistance than a timber sleeper road, and with 
these slow trains resistance is a very important object.” 

Again, I would draw attention to the fact that the result of our 
experience with tramways, subject to the enormous wear and tear 



LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


17 


of London traffic, is the adoption of a deep-flanged rail bedded 
direct upon a solid concrete foundation without the interposition 
of any elastic medium. 

Finally, I would mention that about three years ago stone blocks 
were re-introduced on a heavily worked mineral line in Cornwall 
with entire success and with the cordial approval of the govern¬ 
ment inspectors. The cost of maintenance has proved to be 
light, and it is found that with the modern type of foot rail prop¬ 
erly fished, the fastenings no longer work loose as in the old block 
roads, and the railway, for all practical purposes, is as noiseless 
as the best maintained timber sleeper lines. 

I have explained at some length what I understand by the term 
a suitably formed railway, because I am of the opinion that the 
success of your novel and difficult undertaking will depend upon 
attention to details. I am further of opinion that ship-owners are 
entitled to demand that the ship railway shall be something far 
more solid and immobile than an ordinary railway, even though 
the weight upon the car wheels be no more than usual. With this 
principle admitted, the public, I feel sure, will have full confidence 
in your ability to carry your project to a successful conclusion. 

Yours faithfully, 

B. Baker. 

Captain Eads. 


Mr. Francis Elgar, the writer of the following letter, is a Fellow of the 
Royal School of Naval Architecture, t and was until recently general man¬ 
ager of Earle’s Ship-building and Engineering Co., and is a naval archi¬ 
tect of recognized abilities: — 

Broadway Chambers, Westminster, > 
London, S. W., 29th August, 1881. 5 

My Dear Sir : I have carefully considered the letter from 
Capt. J. B. Eads, of which you sent me a copy, respecting the 
practicability of raising loaded vessels out of the water, and 
transporting them by railway over a tolerably level country with 
safety. 

1. As to raising a fully loaded ship out of the water: It is 
surely practicable to arrange for doing this without risk of injury 
to a well-built ship. Vessels more or less fully laden have been 
occasionally docked in a dry dock in this country in emergencies, 

2 


18 


LETTERS FROM 


and more frequently abroad; and they have also been lifted out 
of the water by hydraulic appliances such as the hydraulic dock 
at Malta. Ships of war, with bottoms much weaker and less 
adapted for enduring the strains of docking than ordinary mer¬ 
chant vessels, have also been docked with all their principal 
weights, such as armor, guns, stores, etc., on board. When one 
sees the rough way in which iron steamers are sometimes docked 
and slipped without injury when light, but with engines and boil¬ 
ers on board, and the small amount of support they get during the 
process, there can be little question of their being able to stand 
the strain of docking or lifting out of the water with a full cargo, 
if means are devised for doing it by which the bottoms and bilges 
and some portions of the sides will be well supported. 

2. As to transporting a loaded vessel by railway over a tolerably 
level country, I see no reason to prevent rails being laid and a 
cradle constructed to run upon it that will carry a loaded ship at a 
moderate speed through the country without risk of injury. The 
cradle will require to be arranged so that the bottom of the ship 
shall receive continuous support over as much of its surface as 
possible, and it should be practicable to do this so that any strain¬ 
ing caused by this railway transport will not exceed that met with 
by ships under the other conditions of their employment. 

I am, dear sir, 

Yours very faithfulty, 

Fran. Elgar. 

Sir E. J. Reed, K. C. B., M. P. 


Don Francisco de Garay, the writer of the following, has been made’ a 
member of the Legion of Honor by the French government as a recogni¬ 
tion of his eminent abilities as a civil engineer. He is at present en¬ 
gineer of the Valley of Mexico, and was sent by the Mexican government 
to the canal convention at Paris in 1879. 


Mexico, September 22, 1881. 

Dear Sir: — I have been greatly surprised to read in a news¬ 
paper that Captain Phelps had stated that Mr. McAlpine had 
informed him that “ your engineer” had selected a route for the 
ship railway which involved a cutting in one place 800 feet deep. 
As I am the engineer referred to, I feel myself bound to rectify 




LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


19 


this gross error, without being able to understand how such a 
great mistake has been made. 

By the profile of my line (of which you have a copy) it can 
be seen that the deepest cutting exists at Banco Marques, on 
the western slope of the hills that line it on that side the Pass of 
Chivela. That cut is 312 feet maximum depth, but the ridge that 
it divides lias only 2,500 feet in thickness. 

I have felt also some surprise at reading Mr. Me Alpine’s letter 
to Admiral Ammen, dated June 3rd. I have not the pretension 
to refute Mr. McAlpine’s criticisms, but I must give some explana¬ 
tions about the location of the railway line that I made in the 
Isthmus. That line for the present is only a study; it may be 
modified, but on the whole I think that it is in the right place. It 
comprises the most difficult part of the route. It has been traced 
with the transit and the level right across the mountain ridges by 
the Chivela Pass, in a single straight line, from the suberb of San 
Bias, near Tehuantepec, to the borders of the Chichiliua River, in 
a distance of 40 miles. The country is very rough, but owing to 
the geological formation of the soil, the work of excavation and 
filling will be easy. The dividing ridge between the two oceans 
in the Isthmus runs east and west. The nucleus of the range is 
formed of blue limestone, covered by a formation of shale that has 
been upheaved, and which constitutes the lower parallel hill ranges, 
with very steep slopes. 

The line which I have run cuts all the ranges almost perpendic¬ 
ularly, forming numerous peaks, very difficult of access for the 
engineer, but most convenient for blasting, as well as for the solid 
establishment and drainage of the way. In all the distance sur¬ 
veyed by me, from the Cliichihua to Tehuantepec, there is no 
change of line. In Tehuantepec, or near it, there must be a turn¬ 
table to direct the railway to the Bay of Salina Cruz, or to the 
Upper Lagoon. I must here observe that I have never proposed 
to carry the railway across the coast range to Shipehua Bay. On 
the contrary, on my return to Tehuantepec from the Pacific coast, I 
gave it as my opinion to JVIr. Me Alpine (on being asked by him), 
that no railway could be conveniently carried across the Sierra 
Alta range, and that the best and only way to reach Shipehua was 
by Salina Cruz, and thence following the coast, tunneling through 
all the promontories that divide the bays. TV ith a ship railway 
even that line is impossible. 


20 


LETTERS FROM 


Now with regard to grades: I have no grade on my line above 
two per cent, and for no greater distance than two and a half miles. 
The ascent to the summit, as well as the descent, are constant, 
but divided in different short sections. 

To resume what we have said, we see: — 

1st. That the line traced and located by our commission for 
the present is only a study, that may be improved and perhaps 
even abandoned for a better line, if, in subsequent surveys, more 
favorable ground is found. 

2d. That such, as it has been, traced and located, the line from 
the Pacific to the Chichihua River, has only one break in a dis¬ 
tance of fifty miles. 

3rd. That in all the line there is no grade greater than two per 
cent, and in no greater distance than two and a half miles. 

4th. That the greatest cutting is 312 feet in maximum depth, 
and 2,500 feet in length. 

5th. And finally, that the results obtained have demonstrated 
the entire practicability of the ship railway, which was the main 
object for which the commission was sent to the Isthmus. I have 
no doubt that 3 t ou will be able to answer the objections that Mr. 
Me Alpine makes to your plans. For my part, I am quite satisfied 
with his final declaration, as he admits the whole question in his 
statement that the ships cannot be carried at a greater speed than 
one mile an hour over the railway. This would be only six days 
from sea to sea, by the route of Tehuantepec, and would even then 
be a saving of time and distance between the east and west coast 
of North America over any other line by Nicaragua or Panama. 
Besides, we must not forget that when the Liverpool and Manches¬ 
ter road was opened, a speed of six miles an hour was considered 
almost impossible; to-day, on the same railway, the trains run 
sixty miles an hour. If we begin with one mile on the ship rail¬ 
way, before long we will run ten or fifteen. 

Although most of the data put in this letter were already known 
to you, I have thought it proper to set them again before your 
eyes, hoping that they may be of use to you. 

Yours very truly, 

Francisco de Garay. 

To James B. Eads. 


The writer of the following, William Sooy Smith, is an American 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 21 

engineer of great experience and ability. He designed and constructed 
some of the most important railroads and bridges in the United States, 
and he is now in charge of the tunnel under the Hudson River, which 
was placed in his care after the occurrence of the frightful accident at 
that work in 1880: — 


New York, July 15, 1881. 

Captain James B. Eads. 

Dear Sir: — As part of the designs of a canal around Niagara 
Falls on the American side, which I made in the year 1857, I 
planned a ship railroad to carry vessels navigating the Western 
lakes down the side of what is called the mountain, near Lewiston. 

The study given to the subject at that time convinced me of 
the entire practicability of moving ships of the largest size over 
land safely, expeditiously, and economically. This conviction has 
been strengthened by all the investigations and observations made 
upon the subject ever since. 

I was told by learned Greeks in Athens that their countrymen 
built and used a ship railway to transfer ships across the Isthmus 
of Corinth long before the Christian era. 

Ship railways on a small scale have long been in successful 
operation, both in this country and Europe, and anyone who has 
seen the large ocean steamers now in use launched, cannot fail to 
pass by an easy transmission from the very cheap and temporary 
A ‘ way's ’ ’ which carry them so easily into the water, to a well- 
constructed railway with a suitable number of firmly-built tracks, 
over which these steamers with their cargoes can be hauled rapidly 
and safely. 

I should be sorry to doubt that the mechanical skill of our 
country will prove equal to the task of planning and building 
such a road, and all the necessary appurtenances, in the way of 
cradles, to carry ships of the largest size, and traction engines to 
haul them. This will be but the larger development of a system 
which is already in successful operation — and such larger devel¬ 
opment the needs of the present demand. 

I believe you can work it out, and I think you have selected the 
best possible place in which to prove it both practicable and prof¬ 
itable. You have my best wishes for the success of your great 
ship railway. Very truly yours, 


William Sooy Smith. 


22 


LETTERS FROM 


The following is from one of the oldest and ablest constructors in the 
United States Navy: — 


Orange, New Jersey, January 22, 1881. 


Mr. James B. Eads. 

Dear Sir: — I have watched with great interest the efforts you 
are making to establish communication between the Gulf of Mexico 
and the Pacific Ocean for sea-going vessels by means of a ship 
railway. In this effort I hope you will have success. With a 
substantial road-bed for your railwa}", on the easy grades across 
Tehuantepec, which, I understand, do not exceed one or two feet 
in the hundred, there can be no mechanical difficulty in the way 
of transporting loaded ships by railroad pvith entire safety to the 
vessel, whether they be built of wood or iron. With a sufficient 
number of rails on the road-bed, and a sufficient number of wheels 
to distribute the weight in the manner proposed by you, the trans¬ 
portation of a fully loaded vessel without straining her hull will 
be assured. The speed with which you can move the vessel will 
depend entirely upon the size and number of your locomotives. 
What weight and power they should possess to move the largest 
vessels used in commerce at a speed of ten miles an hour, over 
your maximum grades, is a matter which experienced railroad 
engineers will be able to determine with great accuracy. 

The ship railway plan possesses the advantage of more rapid 
transit for the vessels, and its capacity could easily be increased 
to meet the future wants of commerce. 

Very truly yours, 


Edward Hartt, 
United States Naval Constructor. 


The following is from another United States naval constructor, of rec¬ 
ognized ability and talent:— 


Philadelphia, February 7, 1881. 
James B. Eads, Esq., Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir: — Having carefully examined the plans and papers 
pertaining to your proposed ship railway across the Isthmus of 
Tehuantepec, I do not hesitate to say that in my judgment there 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 23 

will be no difficulty whatever in transporting, in the manner you 
propose, any properly built vessel with absolute safety. 

Your railway will possess one quite important advantage over 
the ordinary canal, and that is, that the vessel’s bottom, propellor, 
etc., can be examined, and, if necessar}^, cleaned in transit, and 
repairs of whatsoever nature can be made wherever it is practi¬ 
cable to construct suitable sidings, transfer-tables, shops, etc., 
more economically, other things being equal, than in a dry-dock. 

Your well-known skill as a scientific and practical engineer is a 
sufficient guarantee that this great undertaking will receive careful 
consideration in every detail, and that it will be a success, both 
as an engineering achievement and a financial investment. 

Wishing you all the success possible, I remain 

Your obedient servant, 

H. L. Fernald, 

Naval Constructor , U. S. N. 


The following is from the distinguished engineer who is President of 
the Mississippi River Commission : — 


New York, January 21, 1881. 
James B. Eads, Esq., Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir: — I have to acknowledge the receipt of your note of 
the 17th instant, relating to your project of a ship railway across 
the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. 

In my judgment the construction of a ship railway across the 
Mexican Isthmus, in general accordance with your plan, is not only 
feasible as an engineering problem, but the successful maintenance 
and operation of such a road is entirely practicable as a business 
enterprise. This assumes that your engineers will find a route of 
suitable alignment and grades, a question of prompt and easy 
solution, upon which your information is much greater and better 
than mine. 

In pushing forward this great project, I wish you that full 
measure of complete success which your will, energy, and prestige 
as an engineer are so well calculated to command. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

Q. A. Gilmore, 

Lieut.-Col. Engineers , Brevet Major-Gen. 


24 


LETTERS FROM 


The following is a letter written by Mr. Henry Flad, a distinguished 
civil engineer, President of the Board of Public Works in St. Louis: — 

To E. W. Fox, Esq., Publisher Exporter and Importer , St. 

Louis, Mo. 

Dear Sir: — In reply to your request that I give my views in 
regard to the ship railroad proposed by Captain James B. Eads, I 
beg to state my opinions:— 

First. That the first cost of the construction of a ship railroad 
will not be one-fourth of that of a ship canal. 

Second. That a ship railroad can be constructed in probably 
one-third of the time required to construct a canal. 

Third. That ships can be transported on such a railroad with 
absolute safety, and with the same dispatch as through a canal. 

Fourth. That the cost of maintenance will be less for a railroad 
than for the canal. 

Fifth. That although the cost of transferring ships by railroad 
will exceed that of passing them through a canal, the difference 
will be insignificant compared with the saving of interest on the 
first cost. 

Sixth. That the ship railroad will, therefore, offer a safer and 
better investment for capital. Very respectfully, 

Henry Flad, C. E. 

Mr. O. Chanute, the accomplished and experienced civil engineer, who 
is superintendent of the Erie Railway, says in a letter to me: — 

“ I am much pleased to find in this morning’s Tribune your very 
able and clear presentation for a scheme for a marine railway across 
the Isthmus; the rather as I gave some attention to the subject 
myself nearly a year ago, and reached conclusions almost identi¬ 
cal with yours, as to the feasibilhy and general features of the 
project. * * * I see no reason why the railway should not 

be worked at ten miles per hour, and assuming it to be sixty miles 
long, why a steamer can not be transferred from ocean to ocean 
in twelve hours.” 

The following is a letter addressed to me by Commodore R. W. Shu- 
feldt, U. S. N., the accomplished officer who surveyed the Isthmus of 
Tehuantepec: — 

Washington. D. C., January 21st. 
Mr. James B. Eads, Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir :—I forward to } r ou with great pleasure, an extract of 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


25 


a letter from Commodore Farquhar, commanding United States 
ship “ Quinnebaug,” at present at Alexandria, Egypt. 

* * * * * * * 
u I am the opinion that Tehuantepec possesses the best route 
for transit. I do not see why a railroad capable of carrying a ship 
could not be built, and why the long slopes of our route should 
not be best. The fact of a harbor twenty-five miles long, on the 
Atlantic side, is of the utmost importance, more so than the one 
on the Pacific shore, because that is almost always a weather shore 
in that latitude. ’ ’ 

I send you the extract as a disinterested opinion of an accom¬ 
plished naval officer, not only as to the advantages of. the route 
of Tehuantepec, but as to the practicability of a ship railway across 
the Isthmus. Very truly yours, 

R. W. Shufeldt, TJ . S . A. 


The well-known and able civil engineer, Colonel C. Shaler Smith, in a 
letter last year, said of the ship railway, to the editor of the Exporter and 
Importer: — 

The engineering problems involved have all been solved on a 
smaller scale in the construction of various works in this country 
and in Europe during the past thirty years, and the adaptation of 
these tried and proved principles of mechanical design to the case 
in hand is by no means difficult. 

* *• * * • * * * 

It will be a serious reflection on the enterprise of American 
capitalists, the science of American engineers, and the patriotism 
of our statesmen, if foreign capital and foreign skill are to per¬ 
form the work of severing our continents, and then pocketing the 
profits of an enterprise most of the cost of which must eventually 
be paid by our citizens in the shape of tolls upon our bi-oceanic 
coasting trade. 


The following is from a member of the Mississippi River Commission, 
formerly State Engineer of Louisiana, and an engineer of acknowledged 
abitity: — 

New Orleans, February 9, 1881. 

Dear Captain: — Your letter of February 3rd, in answer to mine, 
is just received after “ accidents by flood and field.” The most 


26 


LETTERS FROM 


terrific gales on record have destroyed many miles of our Eastern 
railroad connections. I wish we had as stable a transit as your 
inter-oceanic railway project promises to give. I have followed 
carefully the development of the designs of this enterprise with 
increasing confidence in their practicability and correctness. It 
seems to me to have the great merits of excluding the necessarily 
uncertain elements in the estimate for any canal; of relying upon 
the experience of successful engineering works differing from this 
only in magnitude; of avoiding a direct and dangerous conflict 
with natural obstacles, such as the damming or diversion of water¬ 
courses, the control of floods, etc. ; of latitude in choice of 
location resulting in stability and economy; of facility and rapidity 
of construction, maintenance, and repair, and of an easy extension 
of capacity proportioned to an increased trade. These points, 
together with its extremely favorable geographical location, give 
the ship railway, in my judgment, a decided advantage over other 
plans for Isthmus transit. I shall impatiently wait for the first 
through train.* Very truly, 

B. M. Harrod. 


The following is from Mr. T. C. Clarke, of the firm of Clarke, Reeves & 
Co., one of the most able and successful railroad and bridge engineers in 
the United States:— 

1 ‘ I am desirous that my opinion should be put on record that 
your ship railway is practicable to construct, and can be main¬ 
tained as easily as any other railway having as large a tonnage; 
and that vessels of four thousand tons can be carried across with¬ 
out injury to themselves or their cargoes.” 


The following is from Gen. G. T. Beauregard, formerly a member of 
the United States Corps of Engineers:— 

New Orleans, January 25, 1881. 
My Dear Sir: — I take pleasure in communicating to you, in 
as few words as possible, my views relative to the practicability 
and economy of a ship railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. 
I feel no hesitancy in saying that I see no difficulty in construct¬ 
ing a railway strong enough to carry out the object referred to. 
It is only a question of the strength of the cradle to hold the ship, 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 27 

and the division of weight on a sufficient number of rails and 
wheels, which can certainly be accomplished by any engineer of 
ability and ingenuity. 

As to the danger a loaded ship would incur in being transported 
on a smooth and well-built railway, it is all imaginary, for it would 
be well braced and cushioned in a strong car or platform, 
supported by spiral steel springs on a very large number of 
wheels which, being separate from each other, could be easily 
replaced if broken during the trip. Moreover, the breaking of 
one or a few of them out of so many would not endanger the rest. 

With regard to the economy of such a ship railway, I would 
remark that the tonnage carried over it being moved entirely by 
machinery, and the ratio of paying cargo to dead weight being 
much greater than on ordinary railroads, the cost of operating- 
such a railway must be much less. The cost of maintenance 
should be also less in proportion, for the road would be substan¬ 
tially built and short in comparison to the amount of tonnage car¬ 
ried over it. Moreover, the machinery used would be simple and 
substantially made. It is, therefore, safe to assume that the cur¬ 
rent expenses and those of maintenance would not exceed fifty 
per cent of the gross receipts, which would be more profitable 
than from a canal costing probably two or three times more than 
a ship railway, and requiring three or four times longer to build, 
thereby increasing greatly the amount of interest alone on the 
actual cost of the canal. 

A ship railway has other important advantages over a canal, 
such as the facility with which the number of trucks could be 
increased to accommodate the demands of commerce; the rapidity 
of transit and the greater number of vessels per day that could be 
transported than through a canal; the practicability of building a 
railway where a canal would be impossible; the ability of estimat¬ 
ing correctly for the first, while the latter, if partially built under 
the water, or liable to be submerged or interrupted by water, 
would be very difficult, if not impossible, to be estimated for as 
to cost and time of completion. I am, yours very truly, 

G. T. Beauregard. 


Mr. J. J. Williams, a very able engineer, with long experience in rail- 


28 


LETTERS FROM 


road building, who has made a number of surveys for railroads on the 
Isthmus of Tehuantepec, says: — 

‘ 4 I have been greatly interested in your proposition to construct 
a ship railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec for the largest 
class of merchant vessels. Having carefully examined the de¬ 
tails of your plans for accomplishing the object, and being thor¬ 
oughly familiar with the topography of the Isthmus, I desire to 
express my full conviction of their entire practicability.” 


Mr. E. L. Corthell, the engineer of the bridge across the Mississippi 
River at Louisiana, and of the Sny Island Improvement Works,and who was 
resident engineer at the jetties until their completion, writes as follows: 

44 My studies of the engineering difficulties convince me that they 
can be easily overcome, and I believe the ship railway for the 
transportation overland of the largest vessels can be made entire¬ 
ly successful, and that ships can be transported more rapidly by 
the railway than by the canal, and with equal safety.” 


The following is from one of the engineers sent by the United States to 
Europe to investigate the improvement of the mouths of rivers there, and 
to report upon the jetty system. He is likewise an experienced railroad 
engineer: — 


Richmond, February 5, 1881. 

James B. Eads, Esq. 

My Dear Sir: — Why should not your ship railway be practi¬ 
cable? Ships have been hauled on marine railways for I know 
not how man}'' years, and the hauling of larger ships a longer 
distance is only a development or expansion of this practice, as 
the steel roadway worked by locomotives is the development of 
the tramway, or the old incline worked by stationary power. 

The idea is worthy of the age, and to make it a success you 
have simply to improve and expand the details of the old marine 
railway and make it more perfect. I have the greatest confidence 
in your ability in this particular, and hope you will have the oppor¬ 
tunity to demonstrate it. Very truly jmurs, 

II. D. Whitcomb, 

Civil Engineer in Charge of Improvement of James River. 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


29 


The following is from the accomplished and able engineer in charge 
of the improvement of the Missouri River: — 

United States Engineer’s Office, ) 
1351 Washington Avenue, St. Louis, January 31, 1881. 5 
Dear Captain: — I have watched with much interest the devel¬ 
opment of your plan for the construction of a ship railway across 
the Isthmus. The project has great and obvious advantages to 
recommend it; and from an engineering point of view, it is, in my 
opinion, perfectly practicable. The various operations contem¬ 
plated are constantly being performed, on a small scale at least, at 
all the great seaports of the world, and any difficulties which might 
attend their extension to the scale you propose, could, I think, be 
readily met by suitable mechanical devices. The construction, 
maintenance, and operation of the railroad are quite within the 
resources of our profession. 

With my best wishes for -your success, I am, Captain, 

Yours very truly, 

Chas. R. Suter, 
Major of Engineers, TJ. S. A. 
Capt. James B. Eads, Washington, D. C. 


The City Engineer of Pittsburg, a gentleman who has had an exten¬ 
sive practical experience in engineering works, has sent the following: — 

City Engineer’s Office, ) 
Pittsburg, Pa., January 31, 1881. j 

James B. Eads, Esq. 

Dear Sir: — I heartily indorse the project of a ship railway 
across the “ cord of the continents,” in preference to a canal. My 
reasons are that it will not cost more than about one-third as much 
as a canal with locks; it will not require more than one-half 
of the time to construct it that will be consumed in the con¬ 
struction of the canal; it will cost less to maintain and operate 
it than a canal, and the facilities of transportation can be much 
more readily, cheaply, and advantageously increased on the railway 
than on a canal when the necessities of commerce require it, and 
the very “leviathans of the merchant marine” can be trans¬ 
ported more easily and with as much safety on the rail¬ 
way as through the canal, and without any break of cargo, 


30 


LETTERS FROM 


or any danger thereto. It would extend this letter to too 
great a length to give figures to ratify the statement herein 
made, but they will substantiate it to the full; and I further state 
that if the profits of the “canal investment” would amount to 
“five per cent” those of the railway project would amount to 
not less than twenty per cent on the investment, and very prob¬ 
ably more; yea, it would be a paying investment under circum¬ 
stances of disastrous loss to the canal projectors; therefore, in 
view of all the considerations connected therewith, I have come to 
the conclusion above embodied. 

Hoping that you may succeed in procuring the necessary 
encouragement and substantial aid that the importance of the 
project demands, so that you maybe enabled to demonstrate prac¬ 
tically the truth of the above and verify the assertions made, 

I am, most respectfully, etc., 

A. Dempster, City Engineer. 


The writer of the following letter, Mr. Max E. Schmidt, is a member 
of the American Society of Civil Engineers, was for several years resi¬ 
dent engineer at the jetties, was afterwards in charge of important river 
improvements on the upper Mississippi, and is now engaged in the con¬ 
struction of one of the Mexican railways. He is an engineer of acknowl¬ 
edged ability and standing: — 


St. Louis, Mo., March 22, 1881. 
Mr. James B. Eads, C. E., Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir: — In 1718 Emanuel Swedenborg, at the age of 30, 
performed a “noble feat in engineering by hauling two galleys, 
five boats, and a sloop some fourteen miles overland.” If this 
could be accomplished at a time when steam and hydraulic engines 
were unknown, why should not the present century at its close 
witness the conveying of vessels across the Isthmus in the manner 
proposed by you? I have studied the Isthmian problem with 
care, and am convinced that the railway is the best solution 
offered. The project is based upon sound, well-known mechan¬ 
ical principles, and I have no doubt that a realization of the 
scheme will lead to its frequent duplication in the future. 

Very respectfully, 

Max E. Schmidt, Civil Engineer. 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


31 


The following is from the distinguished civil engineer who is now 
Dean of the Department of Civil Engineering in Cornell University. He 
was the Chief Engineer of Commodore Shufeldt’s Surveying Expedition 
in 1872: — 


Department of Civil Engineering, Cornell University, \ 
Ithaca, N. Y., February 4, 1881. j 

Capt. James B. Eads. 

Dear Sir: — My surroundings during the past ten years have 
cut me out from taking active part in the discussions upon trans- 
Istlimian routes ; but I have never lost my great interest in this 
matter, nor doubted what I have put on record several times, viz.: 

1 ‘ Tehuantepee will be open to the world earlier than any other 
route.” This conviction is owing to the fact that I have made a 
thorough, disinterested, honest, and patriotic study of nearly all 
the bearings of this important question, and my conclusions are 
almost mathematically correct. When your ship railway project 
appeared and was ridiculed by inconsiderate engineers, I made 
computations which proved conclusively to my mind that the 
“Great Eastern” could be carried safely overland upon rails, 
with less strain to her timbers than in any of her sea voyages. 
There can be no difficulty about wheel-base enough to support a 
weight that has been supported in the ways of any dock; or about 
rails upon which to roll the weight; or power to draw it at any 
desirable speed ; and all this, with absolute safety to the keel, ribs, 
and joint points of any vessel (yet built) and transported out of 
water. No bridge that is now in use undergoes the bendings, 
twistings, and shaking that any vessel is bound to withstand, 
upon a rough sea, without opening a seam; and yet, no one 
doubts the practicability of transporting a truss by rail. In fact, 
every railroad car is a clumsily made truss. I am well acquain¬ 
ted with the data obtained, and supposed to have been obtained, 
to within a few years, upon the subject; and I am perfectly 
familiar with every possible point through which a canal could be 
located at Tehuantepee. 

I am sure it is easy to prove that all routes outside of the Gulf 
of Mexico will be detrimental to the most vital interests of the 
United States, and a source of great danger to our national stabil¬ 
ity. But the people at large have not had a fair opportunity to 
study this question so as to place more faith upon its merits than 
upon the men advocating the routes proposed. Time must take 


32 


LETTERS FROM 


its course to allow the specific truth of this case to survive the 
machinations of partisanship. But the time has now arrived for 
effective work and determined action; and I thank God that your 
brain, reputation, and sledge-hammer has been set to work to batter 
the Isthmus into an American highway. I can assure you, upon 
knowledge of every inch of the ground, that you will find no diffi¬ 
culty about curves, grades, or bridges. The ascent of the Atlantic 
slope will offer no more difficulties than the Hudson River Railroad ; 
and on the Pacific side, either one of the three passes in the 
neighborhood of Tarifa or Chivela will allow of no steeper grade 
than 25 to 35 feet per mile to bring you down to the Pacific plains. 
The ground offers you 50 miles to get down in, and as much 
more as you may wish by following the hillside. All the bridges 
required will be of comparatively short spans. You will find very 
little anxious work on either terminal harbor, very little tentative 
work being required, and permanence without ulterior complica¬ 
tions will reward almost any kind of attack. The drainage of the 
works, building materials (including excellent, cement-yielding, 
dolomitic limestone, between San Miguel and Tarifa), abundant 
native labor, a remarkably healthy climate, etc., will be all you 
may desire. 

I think the estimate of tonnage upon which you base your 
reasons for the safety of the government in guaranteeing three per 
cent semi-annual dividends is quite modest, since in spite of offi¬ 
cial statistics I believe the road will handle thirty thousand tons 
daily very soon after its being opened. 

The discussion of this subject is long, and my letter is growing 
likewise long. 

I write to you to give you encouragement to push on this matter 
with all your might. I have no personal motive to subserve ; my 
field is here for a lifetime, which I fear will be too short for my 
purpose. Therefore, if I have bothered you, you at least can say 
this is a case of disinterested boring. 

If I can be of any service to you, command me, and I will be 
glad to furnish any data upon unpublished notes or surveys I 
have, and be sure you have my most sincere wishes for the happy 
issue of your undertaking. Very truly yours, 

E. A. Fuertes. 


In discussing the merits of the several Isthmian routes before the 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 33 

Merchants’ Exchange, in St. Louis, pending the unanimous adoption by 
that body of resolutions recommending the favorable consideration of 
the ship railway to the government, Captain Silas Bent, a gentleman who 
has devoted much study to the winds and currents of the ocean, and who 
was formerly an officer of the United States Navy, made the following 
remarks:— 


4 4 Mere statements of the difference in miles is a very inade¬ 
quate measure of the difference in time that would he occupied by 
sailing-vessels in making these several passages, and when we 
consider that three-fourths of the ocean commerce of the world is 
carried in sailing-vessels, you can see what an important factor 
this question of sailing-time becomes in the solution of the prob¬ 
lem before us. 

‘ ‘ The northeast trade-winds which extend across the Atlantic 
are so broken and interrupted when they encounter the West 
India Islands, that they never penetrate the Caribbean Sea; but 
the northwest portion of them, however, do extend into the Gulf 
of Mexico, and often so far down as to reach well toward Tehuan¬ 
tepec, so that whilst in the Gulf winds are always found, yet the 
Caribbean Sea remains a region of almost relentless calms. 

“ Nor is this all; for the mountain ranges, extending the length 
of the Isthmus of Panama and through Central America, offer a 
still more formidable barrier to the passage of these winds, thus 
throwing them still higher into the upper regions of the atmo¬ 
sphere, and extending these calms far out into the Pacific Ocean, 
on the parallel of Panama, with lessening width, for fifteen or 
eighteen hundred miles to the northwest, along the coast of Cen¬ 
tral America. 

“This whole region of calms, both in the Caribbean Sea and 
in the Pacific Ocean, is so well known to navigators that sailing- 
vessels always shun it, if possible, though they may have to run a 
thousand miles out of their way to do so. 

‘ 4 This absence of wind of course leaves this vast area exposed 
to the unmitigated heat of a torrid sun, except when relieved mo¬ 
mentarily by harassing squalls in the dry season, and by the 
deluging rainfalls of the wet season. With these meteorological 
facts in view, let us now suppose that the Lesseps Canal at Pan¬ 
ama, and the Eads Railway at Tehuantepec are both completed 
and in running order; then let us start two sailing ships of equal 
tonnage and equal speed from the mouth of the Mississippi, with 


34 


LETTERS FROM 


cargo for China, one to go by way of the Panama Canal, and the 
other by the way of the Tehuantepec Railway, and I venture to 
affirm that by the time the Panama vessel has cleared the canal 
and floats in the waters of the Pacific, the Tehuantepec vessel 
will have scaled the Isthmus and be well on to the meridian of the 
Sandwich Islands; and that before the former vessel can worry 
through the fifteen or more hundred miles of windless ocean before 
her, to reach the trade winds to the westward of Tehuantepec, 
the latter will have sped five thousand miles on her way across the 
Pacific, and be fully thirty days ahead of her adversary. For it 
is a fact worth mentioning here, that the strength of the northeast 
trade winds in the Pacific, as well as the maximum strength of the 
northern portion of the great equatorial current in that ocean, are 
both found on or near the parallel of latitude of Tehuantepec, the 
former blowing with an impelling force to the westward of ten or 
twelve miles an hour, and the latter with a following strength of 
three or four miles per hour. 

“ To m}^ mind, there is no difficulty in the way that cannot be 
readily overcome by engineering and mechanical skill, neither in 
the construction of the road nor in the necessary machinery to 
handle and carry vessels of any size and of any weight across the 
easy gradients of the Tehuantepec Isthmus. 

‘ ‘And I further believe that such a railway can be built at half the 
cost and in half the time — yes, in one-third the time — that any 
canal can be constructed; and that while the railway, for many 
reasons, would be of greater practical benefit to the commerce of 
the world at large than a canal, it would be in that locality of im¬ 
measurably greater advantage to both the commerce and the 
political well-being of our own country.” 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


35 


SHIP RAILWAYS AND CANALS; 

By Sir Edward J. Reed, K. C. B., in Reply to a Letter Addressed 
to Him by Rear-Admiral Daniel Ammen, U. S. N. 


[Sir Edward Reed is a member of Parliament , and was for many years 
Chief Constructor of the British navy. He was made a Knight Commander 
of the Bath , as a recognition of his eminent abilities as a naval architect. 
He is a Fellow of the Royal Society; Member of the Institution of Civil 
Engineers , and of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, and is Vice- 
President of the Institution of Naval Architects. He has written several 
treatises on ship-building, and is, without doubt , the highest authority in the 
world to-day on this subject.'] 

Broadway Chambers, Westminster, London, 
September, 1881. 

To Rear-Admiral Ammen, U. S. N. 

Dear Sir: — In a former letter I explained to you that illness, 
&c., prevented me from replying promptly to your esteemed favour 
of March loth, and I regret to say that the same causes have 
operated until the present time. I will now endeavour to reply 
with sufficient fullness to your inquiry, first thanking you for the 
copies which you have so kindly sent me of papers by yourself, by 
Mr. Menocal and by Capt. Phelps, all of which I have read with 
interest and profit. Your own paper and that of Mr. Menocal 
are full of the most instructive and valuable information upon the 
various Canal projects, but naturally have little or no direct bear¬ 
ing upon the Ship Railway proposal. In discussing that I must 
therefore direct my attention to the pamphlets by Capt. Phelps 
which are specifically addressed to it. 

The suggestion to transport ships loaded with cargo from one 
ocean to another over a railway more than 100 miles long 
is one which was certain at first to excite many doubts and 
suspicions, both among those who do, and among those who do 
not, understand the construction of ships anct railways. 



36 


BETTERS FROM 


But first impressions upon a matter of this kind are of little 
value, and all such, whether favourable or otherwise, may be dis¬ 
missed from consideration. Let us investigate the matter closely, 
and in the light of existing knowledge and experience. 

And in the first place I feel obliged to express surprise at the 
contention of Capt. Phelps that the ship-railway across the 
Isthmus of Tehuantepec must be adapted for transporting “the 
heaviest vessels used anywhere.” On the contrary, the primary 
requirement clearly is, that the railwaj^ should be adapted to carry 
the vessels engaged in ordinary commerce, and more particularly 
such as are employed in distributing to the world the corn and 
other products of California and the neighbouring States. To 
Americans, the quick and economical interchange of products be¬ 
tween the Eastern and Western States, by means of their own 
mercantile vessels, would, I think, be the primary object to attain; 
for this purpose it would certainly not be necessary to provide for 
the transport of such ships as the “ City of Rome,” the “ Servia,” 
and other immense vessels now building in this country expressly 
and solety for improving the intercourse between America and 
Europe. On the contrary, I should anticipate that a ship-railway 
across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, which would reduce the sea 
communication between the East and West of the United States 
to the utmost possible extent, would be a great stimulant to the 
employment of American built vessels, of wood as well as of iron; 
and in so far as the wood-built sailing vessels are concerned, 
it is obvious that the demand for immense size would not arise. 
Looking to the still available resources of the United States in 
ship-building.timber, I can understand that the ship-railway would 
be a very great encouragement to the continued building of this 
class of ships in Maine and other States. There is undoubtedly a 
general tendency to increase the size of iron-built steamers in 
many trades, and this will certainly have to be taken into account 
in determining the character both of the railroad and of the ter¬ 
minal works, but after much consideration of the subject I have 
satisfied myself that no present necessity exists, or is in view, for 
proceeding with the ship-railway upon a scale so large as to ac¬ 
commodate the heaviest and longest of the passenger liners now 
in course of construction. The trade of the world, and assur- 
edty the American trade, would be amply provided for if pro- 



LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


37 


vision is made for transporting ships of a maximum displacement 
of 6,000 tons. But even 6,000 tons displacement is a limit higher 
than would be needed to accommodate the vast majority of the 
world’s merchant-vessels at present, and would provide for a large 
and pretty general increase in their size hereafter. I will add but 
two remarks in this connection: (1.) It might be wise, and would 
certainly be easy, to ensure the commercial success of the ship¬ 
railway across Tehuantepec by carrying, in the first instance, ves¬ 
sels of say 4,000 tons at most, making due provision for the sub¬ 
sequent increase of size and weight in such a manner as to avoid 
interference with the operation of the line. (2.) One of the ad¬ 
vantages which the railway project possesses is that, if suitably 
designed, its capability of transport, both as to the size and as to 
the number of vessels transported, can be increased with facility 
and economy. 

You will see from what I have already said that I am unable to 
accept the view of Capt. Phelps with respect to the weight of the 
ships to be carried. I regret to say that I am equally unable to 
accept his statement of the auxiliary weights to be carried, viz., 
those of the ship car and cradle. These Capt. Phelps regards as 
about equal to the weight of the ship and cargo. I am of 
opinion—after making some guiding calculations — that the 
weight of a car and cradle, of ample strength to carry a ship of 
4,000 tons weight, need not exceed 500 tons; if to carry a ship 
of 6,000 tons it need not exceed 750 tons. The aggregate weight 
to moved, therefore should be:— 

For a ship weighing, with cargo, 4,000 tons, - 4,500 tons. 

« << " “ 6,000 “ 6,750 “ 

I therefore regard his estimate as enormously excessive. 

I will next consider the mode of raising and transporting the 
ships. And I would state that although there would be great and 
obvious conveniences in keeping the ship always afloat during the 
transit, I am of opinion that this would involve much unnecessary 
expense, both in the construction and in the working, and that no 
sufficient reason exists for pursuing this plan. In so far as the 
lifting of the ship bodily out of the water is concerned, this pro¬ 
cess is in repeated operation at the Victoria Docks on the Thames, 
at Malta, at Bombay, at Sebastopol, and elsewhere; while the 


38 


LETTERS FROM 


process of hauling ships up out of the water upon a wheeled car¬ 
riage on an inclined plane laid with rails is, as you know, a very 
common one. I had two such hauling-up slips under my con¬ 
trol for some time at Hull, and the company working them have 
found them so convenient and profitable that they are now laying 
down a third for hauling up ships of 3,000 tons register and 
more. No engineer can doubt that either process is perfectly 
applicable, with increased power, to ships of larger size, although 
I should myself prefer the process of direct lifting, for several 
reasons, the chief of which is that it furnishes the readiest and 
best opportunities for supporting the ship upon the cradle as she 
leaves the water. 

This brings me, of course, to the crucial questions: 1. Can 
ships with their cargoes on board be lifted out of the water, by 
hydraulic lifts or otherwise, and upon adjustable cradles, without 
injury? 2. If this is so, can they be with safety transported over¬ 
land upon such cradles ? I answer both questions affirmatively, 
and for the following reasons: I would lay down as a first con¬ 
sideration that in both cases the chief cause of injury to be 
guarded against is not general structural strain, but local strain 
resulting from unequal distribution of weights, and more especially 
of cargo. I may perhaps be excused for speaking with some con¬ 
fidence upon this question, inasmuch as it was in a paper read by 
me before our Royal Society in 1871, and published in extenso 
by that learned body, that the principles of strain in ships 
and the method of estimating the strains, now universally ac¬ 
cepted were first laid down. I affirm that* the general struc¬ 
tural strains which are likely to be brought upon a ship 
by lifting and transporting her, presuming, of course, that reason¬ 
able skill and care are applied to these processes, are inferior, much 
inferior, to those strains to which every ocean-going ship is con¬ 
tinually liable at sea. Indeed the only structural strain which 
would require to be very specially guarded against, is that which 
exhibits itself in, and in connection with the beam-knees of wooden 
ships ;* and even this, with proper bilge support, would be less 
than the like strain which occurs at sea. The strains to be most 


* Perhaps I ought to mention that all my early experience as a ship, 
builder, extending over some eight or ten years, was acquired in the con¬ 
struction and repair of wooden-built ships. — E. J. R. 



LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 39 


apprehended, and against which it would be necessary to make 
effectual and ample provision, are local strains, and chiefly those 
arising from heavy cargo pressing severely upon parts of the bot¬ 
tom, and often alternating with places of much less weight, or of 
none at all. But I apprehend that an engineer of the skill and 
eminence of Capt. Eads, with all the experience of ship-builders 
at his command, would not undertake the work of lifting and 
transporting loaded ships without making full provision, as may 
be readily done, for applying ample local support to every ship’s 
bilge at every part; nor would the company who construct and 
operate a ship-railway, and who are responsible for the ship, be 
likely to fail to have the support carefully applied in every case 
where needed. In fact, it would be made, I should think, a ruling 
consideration in this enterprise to so bring the great resources of 
hydraulic art into play, as to give to each ship that is lifted, far 
better support than has ever before been provided in any docking 
system whatever. To accomplish this object effectually would 
certainly be a problem of much easier solution than many which 
Capt. Eads and other engineers have solved with perfect satisfac¬ 
tion, both in your country and in ours. Nor are we without ex¬ 
perience to guide us in this matter. The hydraulic lift at Malta 
has raised numerous ships, with cargo on board, without the 
slightest injury of any description. From a list of such vessels 
furnished me by Mr. Webb, the Secretary of the Anglo-Maltese 
Hydraulic Dock Company, Limited, I find that ships carrying heavy 
cargoes have been frequently raised high and dry in this way with¬ 
out detriment. 

In the next place, it seems to me quite certain that the appli¬ 
ances which would secure ample and firm support to the ship, at 
every part, when lifted high and dry, would almost necessarily be 
such as would effectually keep her upright in storms, and preserve 
her from any injury upon the road. I take for granted that the 
railroad constructed for the purpose would be of the most solid 
kind, and so laid as to have its double or triple sets of rails as 
nearly as possible in the same plane, and also that the carriages 
would be made with equal care in all their parts. With these pre¬ 
cautions taken, and considering that a comparatively low speed is 
all that is required or contemplated, I am at a loss to see in what 
way danger to the ship is to arise. I will only add upon this part 


40 


LETTERS FROM 


of the subject, that I see no sort of necessity for having a special 
cradle fitted to each ship, in any other sense than that of taking- 
care to give support to each ship, wherever necessary by hy¬ 
draulics or otherwise. 

There are some observations of Capt. Phelps which I am at a 
loss to understand. I do not, for example, know what he means 
by saying that the pressure of the water upon the bottom of a 
floating ship exerts 44 equal force upon every inch of its surface; ” 
or by saying, ‘ 4 whether rolling or pitching, the support from the 
water is uniform at all times and at all points; ” or by adding, 
44 when waves toss the ship about it becomes a falling body re¬ 
ceived upon a water cushion, so to speak, which presses and yields 
everywhere in exactly the same degree ; hence there is little or no 
strain in a well-constructed ship when the weight carried is evenly 
distributed, as seamen take care it shall be.” With all respect I 
must say that these statements are in conflict with both the most 
elementary and most developed doctrines of science, which declare 
that the still water-pressures upon a ship afloat vary with and as 
the depth; that they are consequently different in amount at dif¬ 
ferent depths ; and that when a ship is tossed by the waves she is 
thereby subjected to great, and sometimes to enormous strains, 
and that these strains undergo continual fluctuations. In the 
Royal Society paper which I have previously adverted to, I have 
shown that even the light wood-built yacht of Her Majesty the 
Queen, the 44 Victoria and Albert,” when lifted upon the 
crest of a wave of her own length (300 feet) and 20 feet high 
from hollow to crest, has herbending moment tending to produce 
“hogging” (which moment in still water is 5,080 foot tons)* 
increased to 16,400 tons, while in the hollow of similar waves the 
hogging moment disappears, and is replaced by a reverse or 44 sag¬ 
ging” moment of no less than 31,000 foot tons. In the passage 
of a single such half-wave under her, therefore, i.e., in less than 
four seconds, this lightly built vessel may at any time be subjected 
at sea to a change of breaking strain at a given section of no les& 
than 47,400 foot tons. Forgive me if I here quote a few sen- 


* Foot tons, in this sense, measure leverage which constitutes the 
straining or bending moment. Thus, 5,080 foot tons means a weight of 
5,080 tons acting at the end of a lever 1 foot long, or 508 tons at the end 
of a lever 10 feet long, or any equivalent leverage. 




LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


41 


tences bearing* upon this matter from the paper referred to: “I 
give these figures merely as indications of what may be expected 
to happen in the changes of strain in ships at sea; and they prob¬ 
ably fall much below the truth, since no account has been taken 
of the effect of violent pitching motions, which must lead to still 
more abrupt and violent changes. I will simply add that a very 
convenient way of expressing the effect I have been attempting to 
describe, is afforded by the supposition that the ship is fixed, and 
that what may be termed ‘ waves of strain ’ roll through her struc¬ 
ture. The introduction of this idea will help us to understand 
more clearly how changes in strain affect a structure; for a very 
small strain (considered statically), which would not affect a com¬ 
paratively weak structure sensibly if it were constantly acting in 
one direction, will suffice to destroy a far stronger structure if its 
direction is continually and rapidly changed. This subject has 
not escaped the attention of preceding writers; and Mr. Fair- 
bairn has made some interesting remarks upon it, at page 13 
of his work on ‘Iron Ship-building,’ where he refers to the re¬ 
sults of a series of experiments on the endurance of iron 
jointed beams when subjected to changes in the loads put 
upon them. He says the joints of an iron-rivetted beam 
sustained upwards of three million changes of one-fourtli the 
weight that would break it, without any apparent injury to its 
ultimate powers of resistance. It broke, however, with 313,000 
additional changes when loaded to one-tlurd the breaking weight, 
evidently showing that the construction is not safe when tested 
with alternate changes of a load equivalent to one-third the weight 
that would break it.” You will see, therefore, that it is quite im¬ 
possible to assent for a moment to Capt. Phelps’ opinion that a 
well-constructed ship undergoes “ little or no strain ” when waves 
toss the ship about. On the contrary, a ship tossed about at sea 
undergoes enormous strains and changes of strain, the rapid re¬ 
currence of which adds greatly to their power of injury. It may 
serve, perhaps, to give greater definiteness to the matter if I say 
that while, as I have stated, the change of breaking strain caused 
by waves may, in the case of the royal yacht in question, readily 
exceed 47,400 foot tons, the whole breaking strain amidships if 
she were left high and dry upon two rocks, one at the bow and the 
other at the stern, would only be 114,700 foot tons ; so that the 


42 


LETTERS FROM 


breaking effect of waves passing smoothly along her amounts to 
-l&i which is nearly one-half the. greatest breaking strain that 
she could possibly undergo if accident left her to ground upon a 
rocky coast, under the very worst conditions. I therefore differ 
altogether from Capt. Phelps, believing that he greatly overrates 
the strains to which ships properly docked and transported would 
be subjected, and as greatly underrates the strains to which they 
are undoubtedly subjected at sea. 

If I may now turn to the non-nautical parts of the pamphlets by 
Capt. 'Phelps, I would say that it really appears to me that the 
difficulties which he apprehends concerning gradients, turn-tables, 
tilting-tables, sidings, and locomotives requisite for a ship-railway 
are mainly, and in so far as they profess to be insuperable, wholly 
imaginary. I will not discuss them at any length, but will trouble 
you with only one or two remarks upon them. Capt. Phelps’ esti¬ 
mates that 60 locomotives would be required for use upon a gra 
dient of 40 feet per mile. Now, in a paper recently read before 
the British Association at York, Sir F. J. Bramwell, one of the 
very ablest engineering experts in this country (who, by the waj r , 
said at the same place, that 44 ships upon a railway would not be 
exposed to half the rack and strain that they are now exposed to 
on the ocean ”), stated that at slow speed good engines would draw 
800 tons. They can in fact draw more, but let us accept these 
figures. Sixty engines would therefore draw 48,000 tons, or 7 
times the maximum weight which, as I estimate, it is at present 
requisite to provide for. Instead of 60 locomotives, therefore, 9 
or 10 locomotives of the ordinary type would suffice, and proba¬ 
bly 5 or 6 would be sufficient for the large majority of the ships 
to be transported, extra power being, of course, applied over the 
short distance where the gradients are exceptional. Again, Capt. 
Phelps give 5 tons pressure per wheel as the limit which may be 
properly applied; but this is only about one-half of the pressure 
which is sometimes allowed for the wheels of our fast-running 
locomotives. Instead of 4,800 wheels being required, as he esti¬ 
mates, I should think that the 800 (without the 4,000), would be 
ample for the largest carriages to be employed on the railway. 

In the pamphlet entitled 44 Review of the Proposed Tehuantepec 
Ship Railway,” Capt. Phelps tabulates all the largest ships in ex¬ 
istence and in course of construction, both mercantile and war 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 43 

vessels, and correctly shows that both descriptions have obtained, 
in exceptional instances, displacements of about 13,500 tons. I 
cannot myself accept the arguments with which he follows these 
tables, nor does it appear to me to be necessary to do so ; for while 
I should consider it advisable to make an Isthmus Canal , once for 
all, of sufficient capacity to give passage to the very largest ships 
that can be found, I should deem it perfectly unnecessary to give 
a ship-railway equal capacity in the first instance, because the 
railroad accommodation is itself so susceptible of extension at any 
time. To illustrate this, let me point out the fact, employing the 
table of Capt. Phelps, that although the “ Tokio ” may have a 
displacement of 9,000 tons, and the “ City of Rome ” is to have 
a displacement of 13,500, the two vessels differ in breadth by 
only feet, but differ in length by 123 feet. It is manifest at 
once that*the principal change required in passing from the smaller 
to the larger ship would be that of providing a carriage or cradle 
100 or 120 feet longer. But the fallacy of arraying the largest 
ships that can anywhere be found against a plain business proposal 
like that of the Isthmus Ship Railway, may perhaps be best seen 
by observing that, as Capt. Phelps shows, while the very largest 
of the mercantile ships, the “ City of Rome,” is only 52£ feet 
broad, the war-ship “Inflexible” is 75 feet in breadth; so that 
it would appear to be the view of Capt. Phelps that it would be 
improper to construct a ship-railway at Tehuantepec for commer¬ 
cial purposes, even if it were capable of transporting the largest 
mercantile ships in the world, unless you added 50 per cent to 
the width and cost of the permanent way necessary for them, so 
as to accommodate the biggest iron-clad that England has ever 
produced! It only needs to state the case thus in order to show 
the fallacy of the contention, and to indicate, as I think, that 
it is not by considering the cases of the very largest ships that 
can be found in the world that the project of Capt. Eads ought 
to be tested. I believe that even if this were a legitimate test the 
scheme would not be found to fail in a scientific sense; but 
clearly both the commercial value of the ship-railway, and its 
value to the United States as a nation, are entirely independent of 
these exceptional cases, and must mainly be judged of by the 
measure of facility which its adoption would afford to the general 


44 


LETTERS FROM 


commerce of the world, and to the mercantile marine of the 
United States in particular. 

I do not think I need add to these observations, which have 
occurred to me on reading the pamphlets of Capt. Phelps. But 
in your letter to me you make specific mention of a proposal said 
to have been made by Capt. Eads, to allow the ends of vessels to 
project, if necessary, beyond the supporting cradle by 50 or 60 
feet. I do not understand Capt. Eads to have made any general 
proposal of this kind, and I feel confident that he would confine 
any such proposal to the case of iron ships ; it certainly would not 
be safe to allow such overhang in wooden vessels, but in iron ves¬ 
sels of large size it would, as a rule, do no harm whatever. It 
will follow from what I have previously said, that the bending 
moments due to such unsupported ends would be very small in 
comparison with the bending moments induced by the straining 
action of ocean waves. Of course it is possible that when the 
ship was in motion along the railway, a considerable amount of 
lateral vibration might be set up ; but I am at a loss to understand 
how either the forces producing the vibration, or its amount, could 
well be so great as those which are often experienced in screw 
steamships of immense engine power when under full steam; and 
yet these vibrations, although sometimes distressing and almost 
alarming, seldom do any actual harm. If any excessive tendency 
to vibration should exhibit itself, which I very much doubt, it 
would not be difficult to check it sufficiently by mechanical appli¬ 
ances. 

I do not feel at liberty to discuss, with my present information, 
the relative cost of the Nicaraguan Canal and of the ship-railway 
of Tehuantepec. I should require to give both projects more 
lengthened investigation with that object in mind. All that I do 
feel justified in saying is, that it seems to me that the advantage 
as between the Canals of Panama and Nicaragua are all on the 
side of the latter, from almost every point of view, while from the 
point of view of United State citizens the preponderance of 
advantage in favor of the Nicaraguan route is enormous. 

As regards the comparative economy of transporting a ship’s 
cargo by canal or railway, I am inclined to believe that the railway 
would prove the more economical of the two. 

It was stated in evidence before a committee of the House of 


LEADING ENGINEERS AND NAVAL ARCHITECTS. 


45 


Commons, by the chairman of the Great Eastern Railway Com¬ 
pany, on the 7th March, 1878, that coals could be profitably trans¬ 
ported by this c’ompany at the rate of Jd per ton per mile; and 
this was confirmed by the locomotive superintendent of the North- 
Western Railway, on the 21st March, 1878. If we assume that 
the total distance to be hauled across the Isthmus of Tehuan¬ 
tepec is 150 miles, it would appear that a ship’s cargo can be 
profitably carried for that distance, in the ship, over a first- 
class railway, for $0.75 per ton. I arrive at this conclusion from 
the following considerations: 1st, £d, or one-half cent, per 
mile gives $0.75 per 150 miles; and, 2nd, the weight of the 
ship and car upon which she is transported appears to bear 
about the same ratio to the cargo carried in the ship, when 
fully loaded, that the weight of a coal-car bears to the weight of 
coals it carries. It was also stated in evidence, on the occasion 
above referred to, that the weight of coal carried on one truck is 
7J tons, and the weight of the truck tons. The paying load 
is, therefore, about 58 per cent of the total; and this is about 
the proportion that the cargo would bear, in many ships, to the 
total weight of the ship, car and cargo. These facts are suf¬ 
ficient to show that the transport by ship-railway, over a first-class 
road with easy gradients, in a country where fuel is abundant and 
labor not excessively dear, ought to be about the same per ton 
per mile, for the cargo carried, as in England. If, however, we 
assume it to be twice as expensive, the rate would then be $1.50 
per ton across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. I am credibly in¬ 
formed that at this time $20 per ton is being paid for the transport 
of grain from California, round Cape Horn, to Liverpool. 

It should be borne in mind that there are two elements in the 
ship-railway plan proposed by Capt. Eads which tend to greater 
economy than is obtained in the railway system of England: 
1st, the ship-railway will be devoid of all curves; and, 2nd, the 
cargo transported will be handled wholly by machinery, and in 
vast bulk. 

I am afraid, Dear Admiral Ammen, judging from some indica¬ 
tions which I have observed in letters from your pen, that the 
views which I have herein expressed concerning the ship-railway 
will appear to you both unexpected and unsatisfactory. I shall 
very much regret it if this be so, because to differ with an officer 


46 


LETTERS FROM 


of your experience and of your manifest fair-mindedness must 
necessarily detract from one’s own influence. At the same time I 
find myself wholly unable to believe that there are many ships at 
sea which could not, with proper appliances and the needful care, 
be lifted, fully loaded, from the water, and transported upon rails ; 
and if ships could not be thus employed as railway cars for their 
own goods, I should think it time to deal with the matter the other 
way about, and make large cargo carriages which could take the 
sea, and steam and sail efficiently there. I have, therefore, no 
words but those of encouragement for a ship-railway, regarded 
from my point of view as a ship-builder, accustomed for a life¬ 
time (which is getting now to be a long one) to the designing, 
building, repairing and docking of both wood and iron ships; 
and while wishing no harm to the Nicaraguan Canal scheme, and 
not having anything to say against it, I trust the ship-railway 
scheme may also, for the credit alike of engineering science arid 
of commerce, be hereafter discussed by others with that dispas¬ 
sionateness with which, I am confident, it will always be treated 
by you. 

Will you allow me to add an expression of the very great sorrow 
and pain which are everywhere felt in this country on account of 
the attack made upon your President, also of our heartfelt sym¬ 
pathy with him in his sufferings, and of our admiration at the 
heroism displayed by him throughout them. His name and his 
noble endurance are upon every tongue here. 

I have the honour to be, Dear Admiral Ammen, 

Yours, very truly, 

E. J. REED. 




/ 





J) 

























> 



v g£jL 




-,V- 




* 











































































